In the October issue of Human Rights Solidarity, we
highlighted the findings of three Commissions which collected
information on the killings in Sri Lanka. The government has
promised to take action, but the nature of the action is not yet
clear.

There has been a continuous discussion among local people
about the reasoning behind these disappearances. We have
collected here some of the better-known theories on this matter.
The actual strategy or strategies behind these disappearances
have a direct bearing both on the nature of legal action required
to deal with these disappearances and on the political action
that needs to be taken to prevent a future occurrence of such
cruelty. Many observers feel that no serious attempt has been
made to deal with this issue.

Theories on the Causes of the Disappearances

In order to bring some clarity to the issue of disappearances
in the country, we offer below seven theories about why thousands
of Sri Lankans have disappeared over the years.

The police and armed forces overstepped the excessive
power given to them and lost all control over their
actions. Under the Emergency Regulations, all restraints
on law enforcement officers were removed, and the power
to dispose of dead bodies was left to the sole discretion
of these officers. Judicial supervision was suspended.
There were no provisions even to keep records of the
disposed bodies. These Emergency Regulations have been
labelled by many human rights organisations as a license
to kill;

In order to suppress the Janata Vimukti Peramuna or JVP
(People's Liberation Front), two types of policies were
suggested by some law enforcement agency leaders. One was
to arrest and eliminate the leaders; the other was to
arrest and eliminate the rank and file so that a general
fear would spread and the leaders could then be arrested
and dealt with. In the end, both approaches were allowed;

The actual planning for severe repression was discussed
much earlier than the second upsurge of JVP unrest. It
was thought that general repression similar to that of
the Indonesian massacre of 1965 was necessary if new
economic policies were to be introduced and also in order
to keep the power gained through the massive electoral
victory in 1977. The chain of events beginning from the
early repression of trade unions and political opponents
finally culminated with the elimination of people through
disappearances;

The system of law enforcement in Sri Lanka is so weak
that it cannot cope with any crisis situation. It can
only cope with petty crimes. The only way that it can
deal with anything more than petty crime is by the use of
direct violence. Thus, disappearances have been a
necessary by-product of this law enforcement system. This
implies that the police system which evolved during
colonial times has not developed much further and is not
really sophisticated;

Disappearances were the result of a very deliberate
policy and were implemented meticulously according to a
plan. Law enforcement officers received instructions to
arrest, kill and dispose of the bodies. Enacting
Emergency Regulations made this legally possible. The
police were constantly coached on how to carry out
killings, and there were methods of supervising how many
were to be killed in each area. Incentives were given
through the distribution of money to killer squads.
Liquor was also provided to these squads to keep them in
a mood conducive to participation in such activities.
Lists of those who were to be killed were distributed.
Special interrogations were held in special places for
interrogation. In many instances, the decision to kill
was made during these interrogations, and people were
murdered in the secret surroundings of these places. Law
enforcement officers mingled with illegal elements in
undertaking these activities. Politicians were given
direct access to these groups so that the groups could
execute the wishes of these politicians;

It is traditional in Sri Lanka to let loose the law
enforcement agencies in times of tension and crisis and
to allow suppression by whatever means. This tradition
has its roots in the times of rule by kings and continued
during the colonial era. After independence, on every
occasion of crisis, similar methods were followed,.
Examples include the JVP uprising in 1971, the use of
violence against the Tamils in 1983 and the general way
that violence has been used in the North. This implies
that the use of restraint by law enforcement officers has
not yet become part of a deeply rooted legal culture. In
fact, the legal culture is a very fragile one; and

The ruling party wanted to create an unstable situation
as a pretext to suppress the JVP in order to be able to
eliminate opposition before facing a general election.

Theories behind the Government's Failure to Prosecute Cases
of Disappearances

The following are some of the reasons that have been discussed
as reasons for the government's failure to prosecute in cases of
disappearance:

Ideologically, the new government has not broken away
from the earlier government's way of dealing with
protests emanating from below;

The government has no will to prosecute law enforcement
officers except in a few show trials, which are merely
held to appease public anger and international criticism.
The government, however, is willing to tolerate excesses
as a necessary means of effective social control. This
implies that the political authorities in Sri Lanka are
not willing to undertake the task of seriously reforming
the law enforcement agencies;

Because of the military situation in the North, the
government is in no position to undertake any
disciplinary action against past acts of human rights
violations as it might lead to resistance from military
personnel. In the South too, due to the protests that may
arise as a result of the economic policies pursued by the
government, the government is willing to give a free hand
to the police;

Any attempt to take disciplinary action will involve some
high-ranking officers in the law enforcement agencies who
have been involved in causing these disappearances. This
may well create a crisis within these agencies. However,
if only low-ranking officers are prosecuted, they may
take the position that they only carried out the orders
of high-ranking officers, and they may give details of
these orders; and

Even if the government wants to prosecute, the department
of the Attorney General does not have the capacity to
investigate and prosecute such vast numbers of cases. It
is a very small unit with a limited number of lawyers
operating within a limited budget. The lawyers working
for the unit have a heavy workload in criminal, civil and
administrative law cases and also in representing the
government in many other tribunals and courts. The
prosecution of disappearances involves an enormous
increase in the number of legal and supplementary staff
and other resources. There has been no attempt to expand
these resources to the degree required or to make a
suggestion to create an alternative method of
prosecution.